Cuddles Are Not Optionalhttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com
Saving Western Civilization one cuddle at a timeWed, 21 Feb 2018 20:10:50 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.4126553649The Primacy of Outcome Over Processhttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-primacy-of-outcome-over-process/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-primacy-of-outcome-over-process/#respondWed, 21 Feb 2018 20:06:41 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=912Reading through a recent Vanity Fair article about former White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus got me thinking about a lot of media attacks on Trump. They often attack him for allegedly having a chaotic White House with numerous staff changes, disorganised processes for deciding courses of action, amongst many other points of attack. The media here continues to fundamentally misunderstand the Trump phenomenon, just like they’ve done since he descended the Trump Tower escalator to announce his candidacy. Trump supporters care about outcome, not process.

I can testify to this personally. All things being equal, sure I would prefer for things to work in an orderly fashion. But process remains an order of magnitude below outcome in terms of importance. An example, I want to see the border wall being built. Whatever struggles Trump is having and has had in terms of financing doesn’t bother me provided that the wall gets built. Also, a well thought out process with input from all affected parties done “by the book” wouldn’t mean anything, if that process didn’t result in the construction of the aforementioned wall. Outcome is way more important than process.

This is not to say that process doesn’t matter at all. I don’t want Trump to break any laws and thus get into hot water, even if that is the most effective path for realizing his agenda. Even though a lot of “noise” and rumbling can be tolerated in the process stage as long as the outcome is satisfactory, there remains a line that shouldn’t be crossed.

The current gun debate following the Florida High School massacre is a good example of my point. Trump is currently wavering on his commitment to upholding the Second Amendment by publicly considering ideas like a bump-stock ban and age restrictions on certain firearms. He is also going to attend listening sessions with affected students. I will righteously criticise Trump if he buckles under pressure and fails to defend the Second Amendment. Even if the public pressure is high, and the process is good (being empathetic by listening to aggrieved students and other concerned parties). Again, outcome trumps process.

Part of the reason that so many previously disaffected voters decided to go for Trump this time around is that they recognized that outcomes matter more than optics, “properness”, being presidential and so on. Many Trump voters would agree that Trump himself is a “rough dude” with a sailor’s mouth (and Tweets). His personal moral character is deeply flawed. He’s been divorced twice, said some nasty things on the Billy Bush tape, and if true has had affairs. Yet, people still willingly (and enthusiastically) voted for Trump, because they wanted his proposed policies implemented.

This doesn’t only apply to Trump. I’m deeply frustrated whenever there is a public discussion about gender and minority representation balance in the workplace, school, political representative bodies or wherever. I only care about the actual implemented policies. What the gender, skin color or whatever of the person doing or proposing the implementation is irrelevant. If I need an operation in order to save my life, what do I care what my surgeon has between his/her legs or what his/her skin pigmentation is like? If the surgeon is able to save my life I’m perfectly happy and satisfied. The same goes for politics. Attacking Trump over unruly and disjointed processes might appeal to leftists, but to those supporting Trump we just shrug it off.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-primacy-of-outcome-over-process/feed/0912Politics Isn’t Coca-Cola v. Pepsi. On The Differences Between The Political Left And Righthttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/politics-isnt-coca-cola-v-pepsi/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/politics-isnt-coca-cola-v-pepsi/#respondTue, 20 Feb 2018 19:09:32 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=907A couple of years ago I used to think that the political right and left were essentially the same. As a libertarian at the time I liked how the Nolan chart described politics, on an authoritarian v. freedom axis and a social v. personal freedom axis. Libertarians on this chart occupy the top slot, that is maximum governmental freedom combined with maximum personal and economic freedom. I strongly disliked both the left and the right as they both were too authoritarian for my tastes. I didn’t appreciate the distinctions between them that I now do. There are differences between them. Although the big political parties in the United States both “suck”, in other words both give favors to special interests for money, the combination of various factors means that I now identify more with the political right than with my previous “neutral” position.

First, let’s address judicial philosophy. In my understanding of the subject, the left believes laws and especially the constitution are “living documents”. That means that they can be interpreted favourably towards whatever political cause you want to justify constitutionally. The right on the other hand believes in originalism, interpreting through the intended meaning at the time the law was written. I find myself much more in agreement with the right on this issue. Constitutional safeguards lose power and meaning if the interpretation is done by people with a “creative” approach. We see this continuously in the courts, the left uses the living document approach to encroach on liberties and to expand their power and influence.

I have no inherent problems with hierarchies and differentiated outcomes. Thus, I reject the whole notion of so-called social justice. This fundamental incompatibility with the left drives me towards the right by default. I don’t want to live in a world dominated and controlled by the people that inject identity politics into everything, culture, personal relationships, work environments, school and on and on. We can see how they’re more interested in tearing down existing structures than replacing them with something “better”. If this weren’t enough of a reason for caution, they’re also “eating their own”, attacking other leftists for not being diverse enough, pious enough to the ideals of social justice, not intersectional and so on. Just look at the criticisms of “Black Panther” for not featuring LGBT themes and characters. Utter insanity.

Culturally, I’ve also come to appreciate the importance of and desirability of traditional values as compared to the degeneracy that passes for acceptable opinions and attitudes in the present world. The “free love” approach to living with one-night stands, low involvement relationships, non-conforming family and relationship structures and the like aren’t the equal of the tried and true “classics”. The more I research this topic, the more certain I become.

There is also a moral dimension. While both political parties on the right and left have, are currently, and will continue to cheat, manipulate and use underhanded tactics in order to acquire and hold on to power, there is a difference if we widen out lens. The left behaves differently compared to the right. The corruption in the political organisation-governmental money complex is so heavily skewed towards the left that both sides can’t be blamed equally. The Acorn scandal, the EPA forcing companies to pay money to left-wing political action groups, taxpayer funding of left-wing aligned political forces and so on. This is a unique avenue of corruption found overwhelmingly on the left. We must also address the hostility towards free speech exhibited by leftist academic institutions, social justice warriors and their ilk. A cursory examination of the current political landscape yields a clear conclusion. The right is much more tolerant of divergent opinions than the left. Finally, we have the demographic “human ballot stuffing” the left is engaged in on a wide scale. Their concern for DACA and desire to lax enforcement on the border, combined with their embrace of open door policies towards migrants demonstrate this fact.

Thus, political differences as a whole aren’t skin deep. This isn’t about personal preference between Coca-Cola and Pepsi. There are real and substantial differences between the right and the left. To believe otherwise is foolish and counterproductive. Let’s have the decency to remain honest and use that honesty as a starting point for further political debate.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/politics-isnt-coca-cola-v-pepsi/feed/0907Who Will Unclog The Shitter In A Nuclear War?https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/who-will-unclog-the-shitter-in-a-nuclear-war/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/who-will-unclog-the-shitter-in-a-nuclear-war/#respondMon, 19 Feb 2018 19:15:21 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=903Mark Collett and Styxhexenhammer666 had a rather interesting discussion that eventually turned to nuclear war as a concept. Mark upheld mutually assured destruction as a strong virtue provided by the advent of nuclear weapons. It is incontrovertibly true that the proverbial third world war has (thankfully) not occurred (yet). Although there have been numerous proxy wars and smaller regional wars, the “big one” has been suppressed by doomsday weaponry. It is certainly a valid point that the vulnerability of politicians, military brass and other decision makers in high places has put a lid on the war frenzy that plagued earlier decades and centuries. That being said, nuclear weapons haven’t prevented war by other means. Mark especially could have made the point that the current demographic replacement taking place in the West is war by other means. The United States and the Soviet Union didn’t clash their strongest arms, but what Mark refers to as Globalists and Internationalists certainly have clashed arms with the common folk of the West.

We must never forget about the prospect of an accidental usage of nuclear weapons. Styx hammered Mark on this point. Having recently finished Daniel Ellsberg’s new book “The Doomsday Machine”, I was shocked to learn how close we came to such an accidental spark after the Cuban Missile Crisis was supposed to have been resolved. A disagreement amongst the captain, XO and political officer aboard a Soviet submarine prevented such a spark. This is another near miss in a long line of near misses. If you’re in the least interested in this stuff, you’ve heard about the Norwegian weather rocket incident in 1995, the Soviet missile warning officer that decided not to act on a faulty warning around Able Archer 83′. The list of close encounters goes on. Global peace (the absence of a major global conflict) has been maintained, but it is fragile and susceptible to breakdown.

The prospect of non-state actors gaining access to nuclear weaponry was touched on during the discussion/debate. Nuclear terrorism/blackmail as a concept has long been known in security policy circles and remain a serious danger today. This becomes even more urgent when we consider religion. Thousands upon thousands of people have been killed by religious terrorism just in the last decades. Pakistan, an Islamic country has nuclear weapons. This is the same country that “hosted” bin Laden and numerous Wahhabis and other quasi-terrorist groupings near the border with Afghanistan. That fact should frighten the pants off you. I will never travel to Pakistan, as I wouldn’t feel safe. My trust in their ability to control their nukes is even weaker than my trust for my own physical security during a hypothetical visit.

The concept of mutually assured destruction isn’t as comfortable (it is very uncomfortable to begin with) when we consider that the logic that prevents one side from launching isn’t sustainable once we add suicidal religiously fanatical terrorists into the mix. Their usage of such weapons will kill us just as much as a launch from a mainline state actor.

The idea that the global elites would start a nuclear war I disagree with entirely. Even though there are modern bunkers that feature unheard of luxuries. We must remember that being a global elite isn’t on account of how big your pile of gold is. Being a global elite is a relationship vis-a-vis the “masses”. Think of the Simpsons episode where Lisa could choose between being the smartest student in a class of “dummies”, or average in a class of “geniuses”. Global elites rely on the “unwashed masses” for both their power and wealth. It isn’t the global 1% that creates the majority of culture, food and other pleasures of life. What is the point of having a high status if there is nobody around to admire you? Why would you kill the global supply of “hot women”? It makes no sense.

You could put it this way, who will unclog the shitter after a megalomaniacal globalist provokes a nuclear exchange? A farmer won’t kill his cattle just to show them who’s boss. It is much “wiser” to “exploit” them while alive to produce milk that the farmer profits from. Therefore, I don’t worry about the global elites wanting to have a nuclear war in order to cement their position. Even a presumption of all-encompassing evil in their hearts would logically lead to them enjoying and exploiting as they’re doing now. Alternatively, a mentally deranged power figure could desire cataclysm, but would in all likelihood be prevented from carrying it out by other powerful forces that wish to remain in their privileged position.

This leaves us with the true threat, madness, evil, call it what you will at the hands of religious extremists. They break down the logic explained above. They’re what I fear in terms of world ending scenarios involving nuclear weapons. Fear them, not some fat globalist with a bimbo trophy wife at his side in his tuned sportscar.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/who-will-unclog-the-shitter-in-a-nuclear-war/feed/0903Towering Inferno and Prison Break: Lessons From Two Dreamshttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/towering-inferno-and-prison-break-lessons-from-two-dreams/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/towering-inferno-and-prison-break-lessons-from-two-dreams/#respondSun, 18 Feb 2018 10:37:34 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=898Last night I had two distinctive dreams. In the first one, I was at the top of a very high skyscraper that I had to get out of. It wasn’t clear whether it was due to a fire or imminent structural collapse, but I had to abandon the building in order to stay alive. In the dream, I dropped objects onto a inflatable cushion set up by the fire department (You know, the large red cushions with circular rings on them to catch jumpers from buildings on fire). I’m a believer in the concept of dreams being our unconscious selves trying to communicate something of importance to us. Outside of this concept, dreams doesn’t make evolutionary sense to me. There must be a reason for them that was evolutionarily advantageous.

Thus, I find it of importance that I chose to delay my own salvation at the hands of the cushion set up by the rescue services. I instead procrastinated and saved various objects instead, not wanting to lose them to the fire. In real life this week I’ve moved the furniture in my apartment around a bit, redecorated the walls, and contemplated getting rid of “objects holding me back from personal progress”. In my particular case I’ve amassed quite the collection of anime figurines over the years. I’ve thought about getting rid of them for a few months now, as I want to start searching for a girlfriend around summer. Having a bunch of half-naked anime characters decorating my bookshelves and finding a “nice girl” aren’t compatible in my humble understanding of the world.

An amateur at dream interpretation, I’ve found that the very first explanation that pops into my mind very often is either the truth or very close to it. This falls in line with the dreams being an evolutionary advantageous phenomenon theory. The dream then told me that I was hanging on to physical objects, acting as anchors to salvation or personal progress. My unconscious mind was telling me through the dream to speed up the “cleansing” of my apartment, rather than continue to drag my feet as I’ve done. Sooner or later it will be too late or more difficult. In the dream due to the fire spreading or the building collapsing, in real life time is also limited.

The second dream took place in a prison camp. I say camp because the prison didn’t have large walls surrounding it, it was more fence-like. I wasn’t alone in the camp, I was surrounded by a bunch of other prisoners. We were able to overpower the guards, acquire their keys and weaponry, and see a clear path to freedom outside the fence. Yet, instead of going free, we stayed inside the fence roughing up the guards and exploring the prison. Not long after this, reinforcements arrived outside blocking any hope of egress. Police forces soon had the entire complex surrounded and started to move in.

What struck me was how similar the themes in the dreams were. Both features negative outcomes as a result of dilly-dallying, procrastination, and a failure to realize what is truly important. These dreams occurred the very same week that I’ve made extensive changes to my real life and have been contemplating making more. Rarely have I ever experiences such a clear connection between the two, and such a perfect showcasing of the power or the unconscious expressed through dreams. I want to convey this lesson to you the reader, use your dreams in your own personal journey of improvement and development. Neglect and a failure to spend time on even a rudimentary analysis will cost you in the long run. Delaying and procrastination will win you no gold medals, challenging your own detrimental habits will.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/towering-inferno-and-prison-break-lessons-from-two-dreams/feed/0898We Did Survivehttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/we-did-survive/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/we-did-survive/#respondSat, 17 Feb 2018 15:02:38 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=894The constant bickering on social media, and the state of politics got you down? It certainly affects me at times. It is important to life one’s eyes towards not what the current status of society and the world is, but rather towards where we are heading. The trajectory is more important. Systems thinking over conclusions. Being skinny and fit now doesn’t matter if it isn’t backed up by healthy habits to maintain those desirable traits. Thus, we mustn’t become blinded by pessimism induced by politics and the decline of Western culture before our eyes.

What concerns me the most at the moment long-term, is number one the rise of Islam in the West with all the deleterious consequences to freedom that follows. Number two, demographic shifts in Western countries will electorally strengthen the left to the point where they can bypass the argumentative process altogether and win by default through “human” ballot stuffing. That outcome will destroy economic common sense, political freedoms, infect us all with an aggressive and expansionist social justice ideology leading to negative outcomes in both politics and culture. However bad things appear to be now, they used to be much, much worse, not even that long ago.

Youngsters today (I consider those born after the fall of the Berlin Wall to be young’uns) don’t remember the Cold War, since they were born after it ended. It is almost impossible to fathom that humanity faced near extinction every single day for decade after decade, with many near misses along the way. Things could easily have gone wrong at some point, dooming humanity and most life on this planet to either near instantaneous death in an atomic fireball, or a slow lingering existence marked by suffering radiation poisoning and food deprivation through the onset of nuclear winter. Put into perspective, the problems we face today although very serious, are nothing near the disastrous consequences that could have resulted from miscalculation during the Cold War.

Ridiculous optimism in the face of overwhelming odds has propelled people to eventual victory before, and can do so again. A few days ago, I watched the new Churchill movie “Darkest Hour”. Although the Allied won in the end, at the early stage of the war defeat wasn’t that far off. If not for the Wehrmacht being hamstrung by incompetent decisions made by Nazis in prominent positions of power, history might have had a different outcome. A great example of this is the evacuation of Dunkirk. The Axis powers had the Allied soldiers dead to rights against the shoreline, yet they didn’t press their attack. Göring completely failed to deliver in his promise to destroy the Allied forces using the Luftwaffe. Churchill was portrayed as an almost pathological optimist in the film. That optimism fuelled decisions that eventually led to the tremendous “victory” of the eventual evacuation of a tremendous number of soldiers back to Britain, allowing them to stay in the fight.

A similar phenomenon occurred more recently. Donald Trump repelled near-certain defeat like raindrops falling off a sturdy umbrella. How many times did the media declare his candidacy to be over? If I had a dollar for each time… Much has been said about Trump using the teachings of Norman Vincent Peale and his “The Power of Positive Thinking” to get the strength of character to remain standing tall through the storm. In the end he ended up winning the election, against almost insurmountable odds.

My point here is that we can use the same thinking in the present to chip away at what appears to be insurmountable obstacles. The problem is that many are denying the factual nature of the situation, we don’t have a problem to be solved according to them. At least the people of Britain at the time of Churchill could be counted on to see the Nazi advance through Europe as both bad and something to be stopped at tremendous cost if necessary. Nobody would gainsay the fact that Trump was in a battle for electoral victory. Like him or despise him, that simple fact would garner universal acceptance. So, where does that leave us present dwellers? The worst-case scenario outcome isn’t as bad as during the Cold War, but we don’t have the benefit of a universal acceptance of the situational picture. That will be one of our largest hurdles to overcome.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/we-did-survive/feed/0894Shattering The Twin Barriers To Aspiration And Common Decencyhttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/shattering-the-twin-barriers-to-aspiration-and-common-decency/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/shattering-the-twin-barriers-to-aspiration-and-common-decency/#respondFri, 16 Feb 2018 19:55:05 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=891More than anything else, the time we’re currently living in is rapidly changing our perceptions about what is possible. This isn’t an exclusively good or bad phenomenon. I literally cried tears of joy watching SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket successfully take-off, separate and land its two booster rockets, and finally unleash the red Tesla Roadster into space featuring Spaceman accompanied by David Bowie. I thought to myself that this was the first time in a long while that I was genuinely optimistic and cheerful about space exploration. The prospect of sharply lowered costs for orbital cargo delivery is paradigm altering, a true game changer. The International Space Station floats in space, not generating buzz or excitement about the possibilities of space. Between the decline of the Space Shuttle and the recent upswing in private space enterprises, not much has happened to pique the interest of the general public. That is a shame.

Apart from successfully demonstrating the capabilities of the Falcon Heavy rocket, Elon Musk’s biggest contribution through the launch to humanity’s forward progress might be a shift in mentality. Space is exciting again, you can do things your own way and be goddamned successful at it (launching a red sportscar into space rather than the usual block of steel or concrete, just for the heck of it), the forward momentum has been regained. In fact you could truthfully point out that this launch marks a return to the basics, rather than the flashy prestige projects of the past. It is the equivalent of staying home on a friday night studying for an exam, rather than going out on a binge. Landing on the moon was cool as hell, but it wasn’t economically profitable in the slightest. Mining and exploiting the moon’s Helium-3 reserves is still years away, if not decades. The same goes for the International Space Station, awesome as a technology demonstration, but I can’t point out how it has changed our lives for the better.

What actually changes out lives are the forgotten, boring and unreported routine launches of satellites, powering the internet, GPS, telecommunications and the like. But our world is about more than space exploration, it also features journalism and morality. Here we’ve also had a breakthrough in our perceptions of what is possible to achieve. It might be difficult to fathom as we’re in the middle of it, but the Trump era has seen the role of the press change markedly. Fake News isn’t all encompassing in terms of what’s hot in journalism these days. The press has more than ever before exceeded the limits of reporting objectively into the world of pure political advocacy. The breakdown of the barrier between savings and investment banking was heralded as a watershed moment that foreshadowed the Great Recession and financial crisis, a similar destruction of trust in the journalistic profession and their own understanding of their role has also taken place.

Despite frequently blaming Trump for eroding the concept of objective reality and facts, the media has done more than their fair share of pouring accelerants on the bonfire themselves. The tactic of salaciously reporting sleazy facts in dispute, just to get a desired story out there is almost in the realm of cliché by this point. “Some people say” is a shallow deceptive shroud of legitimacy put on the so-called journalist’s own opinion. The “Golden Shower”-dossier and Trump’s recent health examination are illustrative examples. Look at how the journalistic class behaved sitting in the press briefing room listening to a highly respected White House physician lay out the results. They genuinely desire harm on Trump, they struggled to accept the facts, constantly sniping after the narrowest threat that they could weave into a narrative disfavourable to Trump.

I’m not pretending that Trump is some paragon of virtue, above reproach for his behavior both on social media and in the real world. But his actions must be seen in the proper context, how would a normal human react to the allegations put forth in the Golden Shower dossier? Doesn’t this illustrate that Trump is in fact capable of staying calm in the face of outrageous behavior by the media class? The old barriers are now broken, this presents both opportunity and loss for the people of the world. The intent and drive that will guide them forwards will dictate whether the emergent phenomena of our world will be for the benefit or to the detriment of our planet.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/shattering-the-twin-barriers-to-aspiration-and-common-decency/feed/0891Dominance Hierarchy Participation Deprivationhttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/dominance-hierarchy-participation-deprivation/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/dominance-hierarchy-participation-deprivation/#respondThu, 15 Feb 2018 18:29:17 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=884I’ve quite recently learned that I was lied to as a child and a teenager. I was lied to by my society, my culture, my educators, my caregivers, basically everyone I used as a yardstick for measuring what was good and proper in the world. Growing up in a peaceful part of a peaceful country in a peaceful region of the world, I had no reason to disbelieve any of them, my naivete clouded any critical judgment I might have had. I bought the lie, hook, line and sinker. The truth hit me like a ton of bricks while going through the first chapter of Jordan Peterson’s recent book “12 Rules For Life: An Antidote to Chaos”. In it he talks about lobsters, and how their dominance hierarchies affect their behavior. It struck me that the reality of humans living in a similar societal structure was carefully hidden from me.

Often, we ponder how the victims of despotic and tyrannical regimes can believe the propaganda the regime puts forth and not realize the awful true nature of the country they’re living in. Now I can understand them. Growing up in a society politically dominated by Social Democracy meant that I had an affinity for social justice imprinted prior to the development of critical faculties that comes with age. The reality of the dominance hierarchy being one of the many important aspects of living in a human society that I wasn’t made aware of.

As a result of this unfortunate deprivation of a key piece of knowledge, I went along with the lie that “it’s what is on the inside that counts!”. All the adults in my life either believed this, expressed it, or didn’t offer any contrary narrative to it. Thus, I spent all of my energy on intellectual pursuits to the absolute and total detriment of my physical appearance of appreciation of my social status. I didn’t care about or put effort into my clothing, mannerisms, network building, physical strength and so on. I never instigated any fights, avoided harsh language towards others, and generally behaved like a model citizen. According to the logic that was purported by the authority figures in my life, I was doing fine.

Having now attained knowledge about the existence of and the importance of the human dominance hierarchy, I face the unenviable truth of being in a undesirable position on the social ladder. I am currently on the bottom half of this ladder. Peterson’s explanation rings true to my current standing. I easily get along with others low on the totem pole. This is quite unpleasant to realize. Happily, I’m now working hard to make up for lost time. I’ve lost a lot of weight, started working out, fixed my poor diet, gotten rid of my stuttering problem, become conscious of my clothing choices – now aspiring to dress better. I’m also working on other aspects of my appearance while continuing to build character by following intellectual pursuits.

Am I resentful? Many if not most of my fellow citizens didn’t succumb to the trap that I did. I see them every time I visit the gym, just from looking at them they’ve obviously been there working out hard for many, many years. They dress reasonably well and get along in social situations with the right kind of people. Thus, society’s lies have resulted in my place near the end of the queue. I take some comfort in the cliché that “the only way to go from the bottom is up!”. Noobie gains are by far the easiest to attain, so my pace of improvement and progress won’t be as painfully slow as it might otherwise have been.

It has been similar to playing a board game without knowing all the rules. Playing such a game makes it harder to succeed and win, other players having access to more paths to victory and attainment. All is not lost however, I still have what I consider my good moral character as a core foundation to build upon. The fundamentals could have been much worse. I’ve no criminal record whatsoever, have never gotten anyone pregnant at a young age, have avoided risky situations fuelled by alcohol and have had the benefit of years of reading and consuming books. I choose to focus on the positive outcomes to be had once I catch up to my peers, rather than dwell on what might have been. I’m not unique in having problems, we all do. And many people’s problems are more severe than anything I’ve ever had to face by several orders of magnitude. I choose to be grateful for all the goodness I’ve had in my life, and all the goodness to come through hard work and self-development.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/dominance-hierarchy-participation-deprivation/feed/0884Pandora’s Box of Identity Politicshttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/pandoras-box-of-identity-politics/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/pandoras-box-of-identity-politics/#respondWed, 14 Feb 2018 18:56:50 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=880In its modern iteration, identity politics is very much a creature of the left. They have gone to great lengths to embrace it, support it, advocate it and nourish power from it. Whereas you used to be able to define the left based on their views on topics like economics, now a more accurate gauge of political sentiments is their stance on group identity and its relation to questions of a political and cultural sort. Inevitably, when one side of a contentious relationship develops a new technology, strategy or doctrine, the opposing force is rapidly tempted to emulate it in order to negate whatever advantage the new force gives its originators. This leaves me with a question, is identity politics on the right something to be pursued for its inherent virtue, or something to be viewed more accurately as an oppositional phenomenon to the modern left.

If you asked me on the street I would probably claim to abhor identity politics, instead preferring to judge people on their individual characteristics and merit. However, I also strongly detest unfairness, this sentiment has always been at the core of my political thinking. In our contemporary world, only certain groups are allowed to exploit identity politics for their own gain. White people, especially men are as we all know the exception to the all-pervading phenomenon of identity politics. We’re not invited to the party. Should that have consequences?

Libertarianism, my old political home doesn’t think so. They seem to be divided into two primary camps, one that stands loyally beside individualism, categorically rejecting any notion of embracing identity politics, instead hoping for salvation through a state apparatus that respects individual rights. The other has fallen prey to the influence of social justice, parroting many of their talking points and viewpoints. The latter section of libertarianism appears to go along with identity politics for “minorities”, but not for whites. They can thus be easily dismissed by the non-universality of their framework. If libertarianism has anything to offer in the current political landscape it is their universality.

The tanks introduced by the Allies of World War One were quickly emulated by other powers in the years following. The same was true for submarines, planes, aircraft carriers, battleships and a whole plethora of other military hardware. There was never a question about this development, why should there be? I here ask if a different ruleset should apply for politics. The left has “invented” identity politics, at least in its modern iteration. Would it therefore be prudent by other political groupings to adapt the same in order to catch up in the political arms race? Surely leaving oneself “defenseless” is a hard position to defend.

Can one hold fast to one’s inherent distaste for collectivism and identity politics while at the same time adopting it tactically in opposition to its originators? I wonder how one could argue against the adoption of this “political technology”. If you truly despise identity politics, is it wise to refrain from using the best “weapons” and tools against the side that stands the strongest in support of it? Isn’t that somehow logically unsound?

I think that the embracing of identity politics by movements such as the Alt-Right must be understood within this context. While many within this specific movement support identity politics for its own sake, the points mentioned above softens any critique that can be laid at the movement’s feet. The recent kerfuffle over the Marvel film “Black Panther” clearly illustrates the military technology analogy. Even if you find identity politics distasteful, your opponents won’t hesitate for even a moment in using it if it can score their side political favor and points. Make your evaluation accordingly.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/pandoras-box-of-identity-politics/feed/0880The Role of Technology In Transformative Societal Changehttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-role-of-technology-in-transformative-societal-change/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-role-of-technology-in-transformative-societal-change/#respondTue, 13 Feb 2018 18:52:10 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=874I got the idea for this particular topic while listening to episode 1041 of the Joe Rogan Experience, featuring one of my all-time favorite podcasters Dan Carlin. They talked about how the strategy of non-violence as employed by Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. might not work today due to technological developments in the field of non-lethal riot control. Back during the fifties and sixties police and other enforcers of the current order had to resort to direct physical means to deal with rabble-rousers. This toolkit often included the likes of dogs, billyclubs, firehoses and similar implements. The force used was obvious, dangerous and visually persuasive in favor of the cause of the non-violent party. One of the few exceptions to this rule was the so-called “Tucker telephone”, a primitive method of sending extremely painful electricity through your victim.

Now the game has changed completely. The modern police commander facing a riot might suffer from decision fatigue from the wide array of available options for dealing with unruly citizens. The sound cannon, or LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device) has been on the scene for over a decade. It emits a concentrated sound at the target, intended to dissuade them from lingering in place, forcing them away from the protected area. I haven’t heard a lot about ADS (Active Denial System) in a while, the last I heard about it was a picture of a unit mounted on top of a military Humvee. The ADS system sends out microwave energy at the target, making the victim feel as if his or her skin is on fire. Extremely painful, this “pain ray” can change the minds of even the most hardnoses demonstrators, forcing them to back off.

Additionally, we have electroshock weapons, Tazers as they’re commonly referred to as. Pepperball guns, beanbag shotguns, drones with nets are either available now or in the final stages of development. If the police departments of 60 and 70 years ago had access to this technological arsenal, how would history have played out? Would Ghandi and MLK Jr. have been able to gain the sympathy of the wider public without the famous scenes we all know? Without the firehoses, dog attacks, beatdown after beatdown. This technology effectively neutralizes the optical advantages that a non-violent political doctrine confers to its adherents.

A documentary about a Chinese company selling riot control equipment to questionable regimes in South America I recently saw made me think. Are we approaching a time when popular uprisings, a staple of human political history can no longer play a part in national political rejuvenation? Will despotic regimes have access to riot control systems that are so sophisticated that the people will be unable to overcome them? The prospect is not so far away as you might think. What was science fiction in Science magazines a decade ago is now commercially available to any tin pot dictator around the globe.

We all know about the drone revolution taking place all around us. While we aren’t quite there yet in terms of the universality of the application of this technology, you still can’t get a pizza delivered with a drone (unless you live in some wacky place), yet we can all see that this development is coming, it is a matter of when not if. In the history of my country Norway, we take great pride in the accomplishments of our resistance fighters that fought the Nazi occupation force during World War 2. Affectionately known as “The Boys in the Forest”, these men were able harass, sabotage and attack the German war machine, being partly responsible for tying up large German military resources that they desperately needed on other fronts. When I’m out hiking through the woods I often think about how that would have played out today. Surveillance by drone and attack by drone would have effectively negated the effectiveness of this tactic. The forests aren’t what they used to be in terms of offering sanctuary from prying eyes and physical safety against attack.

When we see powerful militaries struggling against insurgent forces, like the mighty US military in Iraq and elsewhere, that is due to the limited availability of modern technology. The technology to spy on, attack and outmanoeuver urban guerrillas is here, it only needs to be implemented in sufficient numbers to make a significant difference. Just like the German military of the Second World War had many technological marvels, their limited numbers prevented them from having a war altering impact. We are on the precipice of profound change in both warfare and domestic policing and the suppression of internal dissident elements.

I could go on for days talking about the impact of the modern surveillance state, both the government run part of intelligence agencies scooping up everything with a 1 and 0 in it, and also the disturbing amount of information in the hands of a few private megacorporations. This part though is pretty self-explanatory in terms of why it is bad for societal change. I’ll just add that I would be extremely surprised to learn that corrupt elements in intelligence agencies aren’t blackmailing politicians and others in positions of influence with the information they have scooped up. I could also talk about blockchain technology, cryptocurrency and the like, but I lack a sufficient understanding of the technical aspects of these transformative technologies to justify going into them in this setting.

]]>https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/the-role-of-technology-in-transformative-societal-change/feed/0874A Broken Media Is Wrong Twice A Dayhttps://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/a-broken-media-is-wrong-twice-a-day/
https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/a-broken-media-is-wrong-twice-a-day/#respondMon, 12 Feb 2018 18:55:58 +0000https://www.cuddlesarenotoptional.com/?p=846Surprisingly, I’m not going to talk about the mainstream media being bootlickers of the totalitarian, despotic and anti-human criminal Kim-regime brutally ruling North Korea. Others have done a fine job of exposing the ridiculousness of the situation. Hypocrisy is supposed to be a negative label, not a guiding principle for journalism. I refuse to delve into the whole Trump-is-a-dictator-oh-wait-let’s-gush-over-North-Korea thing, it is too self-explanatory. Instead, I want to address two specific instances when Trump has impressed me the most, when he has stood for what is right, despite it being politically inexpedient to do so at the time. Specifically, I want to explore Trump’s “both sides” comment following Charlottesville, and the recent tweet defending due process in the societal climate of MeToo.

The media, the left and all the usual suspects really got their panties in a twist following Trump’s assertion that “both sides” had both fine and vile people attending the Unite the Right rally and counter-demonstration in Charlottesville. Here Trump really distinguished himself from the run of the mill Republicans that have dominated the political scene. They ran for the hills disavowing left and right, throwing peaceful and not so peaceful people under the bus as fast as they could. Determined not to miss a single opportunity to fail to stand up for principles, innocent until proven guilty being one of them.

I watched livestreams of Charlottesville as the events unfolded. Doing so has allowed me to easily disregard much of what was said by the media as factually inaccurate, not reconcilable with what my own eyes provided me information wise. The claim that there were both good and bad people attending the rally is factually accurate. Fact check rating: zero Pinocchios. I saw peaceful people not hurting anyone, and people acting in self-defence to the aggression of the counter demonstrators. I also saw people chomping at the bits, just waiting for the opportunity to smash flagpoles, shields and other bric-a-brac into the skulls of their political enemies. There was also a person (I counted one) wielding a Nazi flag, generating much less antipathy from his compatriots than I would have hoped.

Video evidence also reveals that Alex Fields slowed down before speeding up to ram the crowd in the infamous incident. The claims about him being chased by Antifa, thus “forcing” him to speed on into the crowd directly contradicts what my own eyes told me. At the same time, we must address the other side of the equation. Many opponents of the march held signs, chanted and otherwise showed their disdain peacefully. Again, just like the Unite the Right side, the opposition had some bad apples. Many of them were veterans from political street brawls that seem to be more and more common these days. One guy had a homemade flamethrower, not exactly a demonstration of Ghandi and MLK Jr. like intent.

Good and bad people on both sides – check. Just stating this fact and sticking by it took political courage on the part of Trump. There are many things you can criticize Trump and his administration for, this wasn’t one of them. Unfortunately, the media went completely ballistic off the rails in their invocation of Nazi, Nazi, Nazi and all the by now familiar diatribes against the President. If only they could have acknowledged and applauded the courage and bravery of standing steadfast on principle. Alas, that wasn’t to be.

Two days ago, a “similar” incident took place. Trump tweeted about allegations and the lack of due process. Bravo Mr. President I say. Having followed the issue of false allegations made against men especially for years now, it was truly refreshing to see the leader of the free world standing up for being innocent until proven guilty. He also made a point of mentioning the fact that once an allegation is launched against a target, that target cannot completely recover, the doubt and suspicions that linger even after an acquittal can never be gotten rid of. If only this sentiment had been supreme maybe the (true) victims of the Duke lacrosse hoax, UVA, Rolling Stone etc could have been spared, saved from having to endure a public character assassination, trial-by-media and a permanent mark (unjustly acquired) against their character.

Like clockwork, the media and the left emerged from whatever soy filled cave they inhabit viciously attacking Trump for standing up for common decency. “Trump is misogynistic!” they scream, “Trump excuses harassment and domestic violence”, the shrieks echo. What too few appreciate is the importance of and the fragility of simple things like the rule of law, due process, having your day in court and the like. When did it become a radical notion to stand up for these basic tenets of our civilization? Rather than Trump, it is the media and their political allies on the left that are on the wrong side of history. They will hopefully one day be judged for their actions in the present, having actively trashed and undermined the very core of what made the West great.